Hi,<br>What I am doing is a general scheme based the move ordering ( however that is done).<br>I currenlty do not use patterns. But I do test for other stuff such as atari extension,<br>ladder attack, edge distance, CFG distance, cut move , connect moves, fill board etc..<br>
All that brings my pps down to 1000 on the big 19x19 board.<br><br>After that I just select the first k moves for UCT selection using the formula: k = kinit + (log(n) - log(A)) / log(B)<br>This is the same formula from the original paper rearranged .<br>
<br>I do use RAVE and combine it with the real UCT score. I do not use it for move ordering yet<br>which is what I am asking here. The dynamic nature of it lead me to belive it can avoid the predictability issues<br>I am facing.<br>
<br>I also tried biasing the rave score of the first 10 moves (sort of progressive bias)<br> rave += ((rave / 2) * (1 - order / 10.0f));<br><br>Hope I am clear enough<br>Thanks<br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Petr Baudis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pasky@ucw.cz">pasky@ucw.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> Hi!<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:23:41AM -0400, Daniel Shawul wrote:<br>
> 2) My second problem concerns use of progressive widening/unpruning which<br>
> looks like a must to have on 19x19.<br>
> The problem I have is with the move ordering... If I tell it to moves on<br>
> the 3rd line from the edge are good ones,<br>
> it continually puts its stones on that line (hence forming a square), while<br>
> the opponent controls the centre and also<br>
> cuts some parts of the 3rd line.<br>
> Then I used fillboard to try and fix this issue, but the engine once again<br>
> tends to prefer these moves and put stones<br>
> all over the board. Which is when I realized it is impossible to fix it with<br>
> static move ordering.<br>
> Should I use something dynamic like RAVE to order the moves? That will be<br>
> inconvinient because I order the nodes<br>
> only during first allocation.<br>
> Also the default progressive unpruning formula seems to select too few moves<br>
> for consideration, so I had to add 20 additional moves<br>
> to make it work for my engine.<br>
<br>
</div> You should explain in more detail exactly what you are doing right<br>
now, as the terminology is highly muddled. I assume that now, in n-th<br>
tree descent through given node, you consider only f(n) children for<br>
next move instead of all children. Also, I assume you use just plain UCT<br>
for node evaluation?<br>
<br>
I think progressive bias (considering all children, but giving extra<br>
bonuses to values of some or all children) is much better explored<br>
approach (at least in literature). However, it's certain that just using<br>
a single criterion for the ordering is not going to work well. You can<br>
either use a mix of patterns, hints from some other engine, or (best)<br>
RAVE values. Plus some extra coefficients for tactical checks (e.g.<br>
atari), last move CFG-distance and distance from edge.<br>
<br>
I think you will find it very difficult to achieve reasonable<br>
performance on 19x19 without RAVE. But if you are reluctant to do that<br>
yet, at least try combining last move CFG-distance, distance from edge,<br>
basic tactics and Mogo 3x3 patterns. The larger the mix, the more<br>
diverse your array of considered moves will be. In particular, I have<br>
found last move CFG-distance to be immensely important for gaining<br>
strength on 19x19.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Petr "Pasky" Baudis<br>
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Computer-go mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Computer-go@dvandva.org">Computer-go@dvandva.org</a><br>
<a href="http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go" target="_blank">http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>